[6] in athena10
Re: Athena 10 and Debathena
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Fri Nov 30 13:22:17 2007
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@MIT.EDU>
To: Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu>
Cc: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu>, athena10@mit.edu
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:22:06 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1196446115.6082.25.camel@error-messages.mit.edu> (Greg Hudson's
message of "Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:08:35 -0500")
Message-ID: <tslfxynwq41.fsf@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>>> "Greg" == Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
Greg> Sam suggested that CDBS could probably be amended to make it
Greg> easier to maintain source packages without their own
Greg> autoconf goo, but that's not going to help us if we are
Greg> going to be buildable on Ubuntu releases older than 8.04.
It seems extensible enough that you could provide a package that
extended it and that your other packages build depend on.
>> ~ubuntu7.04 If packages for different releases are assigned the
>> same version number, then not only can they not live in the
>> same repository (under the default pool structure), but APT
>> will not automatically upgrade them if the user upgrades to a
>> later release.
Greg> Interesting point.
Greg> Real-world Debian packages don't use version numbers like
Greg> this. How do they deal with release upgrades where one
Greg> expects a lot of system library upgrades? "Badly" is one
Greg> possible answer, since Ubuntu release upgrades are not known
Greg> for their robustness.
I don't know how Ubuntu deals.
For Debian, if the package has not changed version numbers then the package has not changed.
It will be linked against the old libraries.
If things have changed in a manner requiring the new libraries, then the package will be rebuilt with a new version number.
Having one package linked against the oldest libraries with one version number is a valid strategy.
